The Tax Court’s 2018 Judicial Conference starts tomorrow morning on the campus of Northwestern University’s Pritzker School of Law. For prior coverage, see here. The many panels taking place tomorrow and Wednesday include:

  • Mediation in the Tax Court
  • Discovery and Stipulations Process
  • Litigating Individual Cases
  • Large Case Litigation
  • Whistleblower Jurisdiction
  • A Trip Through the Tax Court’s Exotic Jurisdictions
  • Ethical Issues in Representing Clients
  • The Future of Tax Court Practice and Litigation

I will be participating on the Discovery and Stipulations Process panel along with Tax Court Judges Kathleen Kerrigan and Joseph Goeke, Peter Reilley (Special Counsel IRS), and Jenny Johnson Ware (Johnson Moore).

We have all heard the famous quote about doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit applied this concept in its March 8 opinion in Annamalai v. Comm’r, No. 17-60255. There, the issue was whether the taxpayers could extend into perpetuity the 90-day deadline to file an appeal by filing successive motions to vacate a Tax Court decision. Under the facts presented, the answer was no.

Taxpayers have 90 days after a decision of the Tax Court to file an appeal. If a party makes a timely motion to vacate or revise the Tax Court’s decision, the 90 days runs from the later of either entry of the order disposing the motion or entry of a new decision.

In Annamalai, the taxpayers filed successive motions to vacate a Tax Court decision. After the Tax Court entered a final decision in favor of the government, the taxpayers unsuccessfully moved to vacate the decision. Rather than filing a notice of appeal within 90 days after the denial, the taxpayers filed another motion to vacate that did not raise any substantially new grounds or arguments. After the Tax Court denied the second motion, the taxpayers filed the notice of appeal. The notice of appeal was filed 117 days after the ruling on the first motion and 83 days after the ruling on the second motion.

The Fifth Circuit dismissed the taxpayers’ appeal, which it noted involved a jurisdictional issue of first impression. The court agreed with the general principle that tolling motions may not be tacked together to perpetuate the prescribed time for appeal. As such, the 90-day period ran from the ruling on the first motion, and the appeal was thereby untimely and dismissed.

The Fifth Circuit declined to address the issue of whether a second motion to vacate on substantially different grounds and new arguments would be acceptable. The court noted that it is acceptable in the civil context, suggesting it may be permitted.

Practice Point: Absent intervening events such as new case law directly on point, motions to vacate or reconsider are rarely granted in tax cases. Indeed, filing a motion to vacate or reconsider may provide an opportunity for the court to bolster its prior opinion and lessen the chances of success on appeal. In a situation where a motion to vacate or reconsider is pursued, taxpayers should take care to ensure that all arguments supporting such a motion are properly placed before the court and that an appeal is filed within the statutory-prescribed period if the motion is denied.

As the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) has rolled out at the federal level, its impacts have been felt widely in the field of state and local taxation. McDermott’s Inside Salt blog has published a series of posts over the last few months addressing the different effects of the TCJA at the state level throughout the country, which can be found here. This week, Inside Salt addresses TCJA’s effects in New York, Idaho, Iowa and Minnesota.

For McDermott’s comprehensive insights into federal tax reform, please visit our federal tax reform website.

On March 13, 2018, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) announced that it will begin ramping down the current Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program (OVDP) and urged taxpayers with undisclosed foreign assets to apply for the program prior to its close on September 28, 2018. We have previously reported on developments in the OVDP.

Access the full article. 

Robin Greenhouse and Kevin Spencer recently authored, “US District Court To French Tax Authorities: Pas De Probleme” for Law360. The article discusses a case involving IRS summons and taxpayers’ rights in context of the US-France Treaty.

Read the full coverage on Law360.

In January 2017, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Large Business & International (LB&I) Division released its announcement related to the identification and selection of its campaigns. The primary purpose of the campaigns was to end the resource intensive continuous audit program (where the LB&I audits a large taxpayer year after year for decades) and a move to an issue focused coordinated approach. LB&I originally identified 13 campaign issues and in November 2017, identified 11 additional campaigns and on March 13, 2018, identified 5 additional campaigns. We have extensively discussed LB&I’s campaign examination process including posts on Understanding LB&I “Campaigns”, Run for Cover – IRS Unveils Initial “Campaigns” for Audit, IRS Continues to Barrage Taxpayers with New Campaigns.

At the March 9 meeting of the Federal Bar Association Section on Taxation, an LB&I executive indicated that the rollout of the campaigns may have hit a snag. John Hinding, Director of Cross Border Activities at LB&I, reported that “the campaign work is still a minority of our work,” and its implementation has been slow going. According to Hinding, “A lot of the issue spotting that we’d like to do is driven by data analysis, and changes to systems to allow that is a lengthy process to get in place.” Continue Reading Are LB&I’s Campaigns Stuck in the Trenches?

In 2015, after repeated efforts by Nina E. Olson, the National Taxpayer Advocate, Congress enacted the Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TBOR) in Internal Revenue Code (Code) Section 7803(a)(3). We have previously written about TBOR here, here and here.

Since TBOR was enacted, the IRS has issued information on its website regarding the 10 rights contained in Code Section 7803(a)(3). The IRS provides a summary of these rights. Additionally, the IRS has provided specific information on these rights. To summarize, the 10 rights are:

  1. The right to be informed.
  2. The right to quality services.
  3. The right to pay no more than the correct amount of tax.
  4. The right to challenge the position of the Internal Revenue Service and be heard.
  5. The right to appeal a decision of the Internal Revenue Service in an independent forum.
  6. The right to finality.
  7. The right to privacy.
  8. The right to confidentiality.
  9. The right to retain representation.
  10. The right to a fair and just tax system.

Continue Reading Taxpayer Bill of Rights | Another Tool for Taxpayers?

We have previously commented on changes at the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Appeals Division, including: (1) the allowance of Appeals to invite representatives from the IRS Examination Division (Exam) and IRS Office of Chief Counsel to the Appeals conference, (2) the limitations on in-person conferences, and (3) the use of “virtual” conferences.

IRS Appeals Chief Donna Hansberry discussed these changes at a recent tax law conference held by the Federal Bar Association. According to reports, Ms. Hansberry wants feedback from practitioners on the compliance attendance and virtual conferences. Continue Reading More Changes to IRS Appeals’ Practices?

In late 2017, we provided a brief overview of statutes of limitation in the international tax context. At that time, we noted a forthcoming article on the subject.  We are pleased to report that our expanded article on the subject has been published in the January-February 2018 edition of the International Tax Journal.  The full article can be viewed here.